Minutes:
Mr. J. Walsh, Legal Services Manager, attended in connection with this item and Councillor McVeigh left the room whilst the matter was under discussion.)
The Committee considered the undernoted report:
“1 Relevant Background Information
1.1 Members will be aware that, in March last year, a request for funding was received from the Employment Services Board (ESB). This request was for £15,000 interim funding as the organisation expected to receive funding under the proposed Social Investment Fund (SIF). By June 2011, the funding still had not been released so ESB made a further request for an additional 6 month’s funding (£30,000), again in anticipation of SIF support. The total amount made available to the organisation over this 9 month period was £45,000.
1.2 In the period January-March 2012, the organisation received funding from a private sector sponsor. However that funding has now come to an end and, in the absence of any additional funding, the organisation has again approached the Council with a request that we provide funding for a 9 month period, up to an amount of £58,500.
2 Key Issues
2.1 Members may be aware that the Employment Services Board (ESB) was established in 2001 as part of the West Belfast and Greater Shankill Task Forces. Along with the Employers’ Forum (managed by Business in the Community (BITC)) and the Jobs Assist Centres (JACs)), it was intended that they would provide a support framework for developing targeted initiatives to help those furthest from the labour market to find employment.
2.2 ESB was funded by DETI and DEL initially to perform a range of functions but, since March 2011, it has had no core funding and has been seeking support from a range of sources.
2.3 ESB is a stakeholder organisation, bringing together a range of organisations including the Area Partnership Boards for West Belfast and Greater Shankill; Belfast Trust; Department for Employment and Learning (DEL); Social Security Agency; training organisations and the Employers’ Forum. Belfast City Council is also represented at both officer and member level.
2.4 In 2011, ESB was involved in a number of initiatives including:
· Participation in the TQ Work group providing input and advice on maximising benefit to those furthest from the labour market
· Monitoring work on the impact of Welfare Reform on the unemployed in west Belfast and Shankill areas
· Support for further funding for development of the Health Employment Partnership.
2.5 Following a meeting with officers on 4 April, correspondence was received from Padraic White, Chair of the Employment Services Board on 5 April 2012 to request that the Council provide an additional £58,500 funding for the coming nine months, in light of ongoing delays with the Social Investment Fund (SIF). The meeting with officers focused on understanding how ESB might add value to Council activity as part of the Investment Programme.
2.6 A similar, separate meeting took place with the Employers’ Forum (EF) who had also submitted a funding request to Council to look at how they could support Council in delivering the employability elements of the Investment Programme. Officers provided feedback at both meetings to indicate that DEL had committed to working with the Council to support the target of 400 work placements and 200 new jobs. This support from DEL would be at no cost to the Council as it would be delivered through existing contractors across the city. In addition, there is an opportunity to target specific locations or target groups (including long-term unemployed) in these initiatives, thereby adhering to the Council’s commitment to creating ‘opportunities for all’. Employers’ Forum will now consider alternative ways in which they might support the council in this work.
2.7 The request for support from ESB suggests that the organisation is uniquely placed to support Council and local communities in developing approaches to maximise the impact of investments and opportunities within the Investment Programme. The proposal suggests that they could work with Council to progress initiatives such as Springvale lnnovation Centre, the Argyle Business Park, Shankill Piazza, Black Mountain Shared Spaces, Casement Park and St. Comgall's. In addition, it is noted that ESB is keen to ‘ensure effective participation and assistance in the development, roll out and monitoring of the specific employment, employability and skills initiatives and approaches including the Bursary initiative, the targeted employability initiatives, the 200 additional Council jobs and 400 placement, internship and apprenticeship places as well as the Belfast Social Clause Delivery Forum and the citywide Employability and Skills Steering Group’.
2.8 Members will be aware that work is progressing on the individual components of the Investment Programme and a report on the proposed way forward on the employability initiatives is to be submitted to Strategic Policy and Resources Committee in May 2012. In addition, a report on options for way forward on the bursary scheme is to be presented to the Development Committee in the same timeframe. Both reports will be based on discussion with potential partners as to how these initiatives can be delivered in a way to ensures maximum impact, while operating within constrained financial resources.
2.9 Members should also note that the proposed city-wide employability and skills group – which this Committee agreed – has been included as a commitment within the Programme for Government. A number of recent meetings have taken place with DEL and other key statutory partners and a follow-up meeting is scheduled for 8 May. At this stage, it is anticipated that the partners will agree the broad framework for action as well as a number of priority projects to progress in the immediate term, including the potential resourcing issues associated with these. From the preliminary discussions, it is likely that early initiatives might focus on young unemployed (16-24) in a number of locations – particularly those where the problem is most acute. Clearly, it will be important to work with relevant local partners on these initiatives.
3 Recommendations
3.1 Members are asked to:
· Consider the request for funding from Employment Services Board for £58,500 for a 9 month period”
The Committee was reminded that the request for financial assistance had been the third such occasion on which Council had been approached in this regard. Members pointed out that the responsibility for funding such organisations lay ultimately with central government agencies and that the Council could only make a payment under the specialised expenditure powers which it possessed under Section 37 of the Local Government Finance Act.
The Legal Services Manager reminded the Committee that, should it be so minded to accede to the request, it must assure itself that the expenditure provided would bring direct benefit to the whole of the City and its ratepayers. In addition, Members should be satisfied that any benefits accruing would be commensurate and measurable with the payment to be made. It was suggested that the Committee should request that the Employment Services Board provide Members with a detailed plan of action which would outline the specific steps it would take to utilise the Council’s payment in accordance with the requirements of Section 37 of the Local Government Finance Act.
After discussion, it was
Moved by Councillor Stoker,
Seconded by Councillor Webb,
That the Committee agrees to defer consideration of the request for financial assistance by the Employment Services Board to enable further information to be received in respect of that organisation’s specific plans to utilise the proposed Council contribution for the benefit of the whole of the City.
On a vote by show of hands, five Members voted for the proposal and eight against and it was accordingly declared lost.
Further Proposal
Moved by Councillor Reynolds,
Seconded by Councillor Maskey,
That the Committee agrees to provide funding in the sum of £58,500 to the Employment Services Board under the special expenditure powers as set out within Section 37 of Local Government Act; it being the opinion of the Committee that the expenditure would be in the interests of, and would bring direct benefit to, the City and the ratepayers of the City, with the Committee being satisfied that the benefit so accruing would be commensurate with the payment to be made.
On a vote by show of hands, eight Members voted for the proposal and five against and it was accordingly declared carried. In addition, the Committee agreed to the following course of action:
· That a letter to be sent to the Employment Services Board requesting that, prior to the meeting of the Council on 1st May, it would provide all Members with a detailed plan of action on how the Council’s contribution would be used to deliver tangible benefits to the City in accordance with the provisions as set out within Section 37 of Local Government Act;
· That a letter be forwarded to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment and the Department of Employment and Learning expressing the Council’s concern at the lack of funding provided to the Employment Services Board which, in turn, had placed the Council in the position where it was being approached for assistance; and
· That a letter be forwarded to the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister expressing the Committee’s concerns at the delay in the establishment of a Social Investment Fund which could be used to support organisations such as the Employment Services Board.